Re: [science-iwg] [location-iwg] DOIs for scientific software

[Martin Hammitzsch <martin.hammitzsch@xxxxxxxxx>]

Just to keep the thread going: I'd be interested in the Ottawa trip.
Anyone else?

Cheers,
Martin


On 9 July 2015 at 16:05, Andrew Ross <andrew.ross@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Martin,
>
> (x-posted to Science & LT)
>
> Thank you again for the great work you've done pushing this forward!
>
> Ottawa is obviously super easy for me since I live here. I'd be happy to
> play host and show whomever can come around the city. Timing it so I'm
> actually here is important of course. :-)
>
> I would like to hear from those that are interested. Thanks!
>
> Andrew
>
> On 09/07/15 05:19, Martin Hammitzsch wrote:
>>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> You may remember our discussion on minting DOIs to software releases /
>> packages hosted by the Science and LocationTech WGs:
>> - http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/science-iwg/msg00815.html
>> - http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/science-iwg/msg00819.html
>>
>> Summarized I understand that many of us would be interested in a
>> concept how the Eclipse Foundation and Community could implement a
>> working solution.
>>
>> So far we come up with a document draft collecting general ideas,
>> thoughts and questions:
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/10GNuXtjJNOJZ9AVzfeZP_cybYILjsh6KQ6f-htQH190/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> Another document summarized how and why the Eclipse Foundation could
>> make use of DataCite DOIs and which steps could be the next ones to
>> address the details:
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WoQxo8C81S62CgVWjTVqLwpuB8WuQKYMJnd6PRHkBeE/edit?usp=sharing
>>
>> I suggest that one of the next steps should be a meeting in Ottawa
>> with the National Science Library to present the idea, to discuss
>> options, to touch contractual matters, and to get support for drafting
>> a detailed concept.
>>
>> Please let us know what you think.
>>
>> Best,
>> Martin
>>
>>
>> On 18 April 2015 at 12:01, Philip Wenig <philip.wenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> we will work out a draft how this could be implemented the next weeks. It
>>> will figure out the scope, the benefits for the Science and LocationTech
>>> WGs
>>> as well as the costs and obligations it would have.
>>>
>>> We also try to cover all mentioned thoughts and criticism as well as the
>>> upcoming ones.
>>>
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Philip
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 17.04.2015 um 23:11 schrieb Martin Hammitzsch:
>>>
>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>
>>> Regarding the metadata I agree. It's something we might use as a first
>>> starting point together with a related landing page that more or less
>>> shows
>>> the metadata in a convenient way plus additional information such as
>>> metrics
>>> and some interactive elements like links or a web based code repository
>>> browser.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, the DOI thing isn't that easy. Either Eclipse becomes a
>>> DOI
>>> minting agency itself or an existing partnership with a partner who
>>> already
>>> is a registered agency supports this idea. Thus the DOI infrastructure
>>> provided by the partner already exists, is maintained, and finally can be
>>> used for minting DOIs, for maintaining the metadata, and for properly
>>> redirecting the DOI to the landing page.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, an agency is a member of the International DOI Foundation
>>> (IDF), as far as I know, and has to commit to certain regulations, e.g.
>>> if
>>> an agency shuts down services than the other member/agencies have to sort
>>> out how DOI labeled digital objects are taken over by the other members.
>>> So
>>> if the Eclipse Foundation wants to mint DOIs itself it finally means the
>>> foundation is part of a kind of social commitment and has to consider
>>> further implications. So having the opportunity to get support by a
>>> partner
>>> who already takes care of all of this in the role of a DOI minting agency
>>> would possibly be highly beneficial in a first phase.
>>>
>>> And last but not least, the IDF membership and the minting of DOIs costs
>>> money, as far as I know.
>>>
>>> So the one thing is the technical implementation and the set-up of some
>>> additional processes that possibly can be put on top as a kind of simple
>>> layer realising the idea without touching what already exists and is
>>> working
>>> for the WGs.
>>>
>>> The other thing is the DOI related stuff, that should be well thought out
>>> since this is another world we depend on if we want to assign DOIs to
>>> software releases. Unfortunately, this is the currency in sciences.
>>> However,
>>> we may also consider the use of the Handle system at first, which is the
>>> foundation of the DOI system. As far as I know, its no problem to make
>>> use
>>> of the Handle system at no cost. This would allow a first proof of
>>> concept.
>>>
>>> Just some further thoughts ... I am not an expert in this library and
>>> publisher driven DOI world.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Martin
>>>
>>> On 17 Apr 2015 21:58, "Andrew Ross" <andrew.ross@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear Philip, Martin, and All
>>>>
>>>> I like the idea FWIW. And it sounds quite reasonable to implement.
>>>>
>>>> Part of the meta data could be a git commit and direct link to the code
>>>> repository.
>>>>
>>>> I suspect the team/community could determine the meta data fields
>>>> without
>>>> too much trouble.
>>>>
>>>> How would the DOI be generated? I'm wondering if this is something we
>>>> can
>>>> automate and simply give to all releases and maybe even all builds.
>>>>
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>>
>>>> Andrew
>>>>
>>>> On 16/04/15 08:04, Philip Wenig wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Martin gave an excellent talk about the publication of software at the
>>>>> EGU meeting yesterday. Scientists get reward for papers but not for
>>>>> software. Papers are cited, software not. That's a drawback for a
>>>>> scientific
>>>>> career. As we know, software has become crucial in scientific research
>>>>> nowadays. Hence, I'd like to share some of Martin's ideas with you:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Certain Science/LocationTech WG releases/packages get a DOI
>>>>> * The DOI points to a landing page with appropriate metadata to cite
>>>>> the
>>>>> release/package
>>>>> * The release/package can be cited and will be ranked on Google Scholar
>>>>> and other systems
>>>>>
>>>>> = This could be an incentive for more scientists to publish their
>>>>> software under the umbrella of the Science and LocationTech WG.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's your opinion?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>> Philip
>>>>>
>>>>> PDF of Martin's presentation:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1tulhwtEK9l1yGaAX1YWsMR7OrQAwWDee4N2M1Yy7bIo/edit?pli=1#slide=id.gada00e2fc_0_866
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> location-iwg mailing list
>> location-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
>> from this list, visit
>> https://locationtech.org/mailman/listinfo/location-iwg
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> location-iwg mailing list
> location-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from
> this list, visit
> https://locationtech.org/mailman/listinfo/location-iwg